Analysis of the long-term prognosis of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt treatment for esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage concomitant with sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients
10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20240414-00203
- VernacularTitle:经颈静脉肝内门体分流术治疗肝硬化食管胃静脉曲张出血伴肌肉减少症患者远期预后分析
- Author:
Xixuan WANG
1
;
Ming ZHANG
;
Xiaochun YIN
;
Bo GAO
;
Lihong GU
;
Wei LI
;
Jiangqiang XIAO
;
Song ZHANG
;
Wei ZHANG
;
Xin ZHANG
;
Xiaoping ZOU
;
Lei WANG
;
Yuzheng ZHUGE
;
Feng ZHANG
Author Information
1. 南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院消化内科，南京 210000
- Keywords:
Liver cirrhosis;
Esophagogastric variceal bleeding;
Sarcopenia;
Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt;
Therapeutic
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hepatology
2024;32(8):744-752
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore whether transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) can improve the prognosis of esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EGVB) combined with sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was performed. A total of 464 cases with cirrhotic EGVB who received standard or TIPS treatment between January 2017 and December 2019 were selected. Regular follow-up was performed for the long-term after treatment. The primary outcome was transplantation-free survival. The secondary endpoints were rebleeding and overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE). The obtained data were statistically analyzed. The t-test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to compare continuous variables between groups. The χ2 test, or Fisher's exact probability test, was used to compare categorical variables between groups. Results:The age of the included patients was 55.27±13.86 years, and 286 cases were male. There were 203 cases of combined sarcopenia and 261 cases of non-combined sarcopenia. The median follow-up period was 43 months. The two groups had no statistically significant difference in follow-up time. There was no statistically significant difference in transplant-free survival between the TIPS group and the standard treatment group in the overall cohort ( HR=1.31, 95% CI: 0.97-1.78, P=0.08). The TIPS patient group with cirrhosis combined with sarcopenia had longer transplant-free survival (median survival: 47.76 vs. 52.45, χ2=4.09; HR=1.55, 95 CI: 1.01~2.38, P=0.04). There was no statistically significant difference in transplant-free survival between the two kinds of treatments for patients without sarcopenia ( HR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.78~1.88, P=0.39). Rebleeding time was prolonged in TIPS patients with or without sarcopenia combination (patients without combined sarcopenia: median rebleeding time: 39.48 vs. 53.61, χ2=18.68; R=2.47, 95 CI: 1.67~3.65, P<0.01; patients with sarcopenia: median rebleeding time: 39.91 vs. 50.68, χ2=12.36; HR=2.20, 95 CI: 1.42~3.40, P<0.01). TIPS patients had an increased 1-year OHE incidence rate compared to the standard treatment group (sarcopenia patients: 6.93% vs. 16.67%, χ2=3.87, P=0.049; patients without sarcopenia combination: 2.19% vs. 9.68%, χ2=8.85, P=0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the long-term OHE incidence rate between the two kinds of treatment groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion:TIPS can significantly prolong transplant-free survival compared to standard treatment as a secondary prevention of EGVB concomitant with sarcopenia in patients with cirrhosis. However, its advantage is not prominent for patients with cirrhosis in EGVB without sarcopenia.
